Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Burlington board votes to issue PPEL notes, choosing larger levy option to fund auditorium and Aldo work
Summary
The Burlington Community School District voted Aug. 25 to issue PPEL notes borrowing against the full $1.34 levy (option 2), authorizing approximately $7.1 million in notes to help fund auditorium renovations and work at Aldo Intermediate; the board directed staff to seek bank proposals and close before year end.
Get email alerts on the Capital Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Burlington Community School District board voted Aug. 25 to borrow against the full $1.34 PPEL levy, authorizing notes of roughly $7.1 million to help fund renovation of the high‑school auditorium and projects at Aldo Intermediate. The motion to pursue the second financing option passed after a presentation from Tim Oswald of Piper Jaffray and discussion about costs, risks and timing.
Tim Oswald, who advised the district on its plan of finance, told the board the district had two primary options: borrow against the voter‑approved 67¢ portion only (about $3.5 million) or borrow against the total $1.34 levy (about $7.1 million). The larger option offers a defensive benefit, Oswald said — it would ‘lock in’ levy capacity against potential state property‑tax changes — though it costs roughly $25,000 more across the modeled period because of higher variable bonding costs.
Oswald outlined expected payback timing and expenses: a 3.5‑million‑dollar loan carries roughly $350,000 in interest in the example he modeled, and either option would be repaid over a five‑year window through fiscal 2026–2030. He said the plan is to seek bank placements first and, if bank terms are unattractive, pivot to a public offering; bank proposals are expected within about a month and district staff may call a special meeting to accept favorable bank bids. If bank placement fails, a public offering and bond rating would be pursued with a planned close in December.
Board members pressed on cash‑flow impacts and on how the choice would affect other buildings’ maintenance. Oswald and district staff said option 2 reduces the amount the district would need to backfill from district cash compared with option 1 but still would not fully fund the total project costs; architect and bidding costs (reported to be roughly 8% of the project) and other maintenance obligations remain.
Director (unnamed in the transcript) moved to approve option 2 — borrowing against the $1.34 levy — and the motion was seconded and approved. The board instructed Greg Reynolds and Tim Oswald to move forward with bank outreach and, if needed, a public sale to close before the holidays.
Next steps: staff will solicit bank proposals, potentially convene a special board meeting to accept terms, and aim to close the financing in October (bank route) or by Dec. 10 (public offering route).

